Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
CSPAN 12
CSPAN2 8
MSNBC 8
MSNBCW 8
FBC 7
WHUT (Howard University Television) 6
KQED (PBS) 4
KRCB (PBS) 3
WETA 3
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 73
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 73 (some duplicates have been removed)
interconnected with the rest of the world. >> foreign policy is actually not foreign. >> america has faced great hardship before and each time we have risen to the challenge. >> the ultimate test is to move our society from where it is to where it has never been. >> join us as we explore today's most critical global issues. join us for great decisions. >> great decisions is produced by the foreign policy association, inspiring americans to learn more about the world. sponsorship of great decisions is provided by credit suisse, eni, the hurford foundation, and pricewaterhousecoopers llp. >> coming up next, the intervention calculation. (instrumental music) >> historically the u.s. leaned heavily on strategic interventions to help counter the influence of communism. >> the reagan doctrine was a notion that we would support those that sought to oppose soviet domination. >> during the cold war there was a polarized world - there was the soviet union, there was the united states and a lot of our interventions were used to block the advance of communism, and so very ideological basis for our, our inte
that is a loss in trying to create a bipartisan foreign policy in washington and the reduction was probably one of the most important congressional initiatives that we have ever seen. the idea that you could take that kind of money from the defense budget that didn't make the military very happy and apply it to demilitarizing the strategic arsenal of the former soviet union was extremely important. we go from bush to clinton, clinton didn't want to deal with foreign policy like so many presidents they felt they were elected to do domestic things. clinton had no background in foreign policy, no interest in the foreign policy. people say they went to georgetown, the school really wasn't good enough as i am concerned. i hope i am not offending anyone in georgetown she put together a security team all of them were gone within a year or two for the most part when you look at christopher and the cia was a very peculiar appointment. he did something that needs to be corrected. he was in the foreign policy bureaucracy as i am concerned he brought to the right wing and abolishing the arms control and di
him the most important person in the mix this week in the vice president spoke about foreign policy challenges at the munish security conference. >> we have made it clear at the outset that we would not-- we would be prepared to me bilaterally with the irani leadership. we would not make it a secret that we were doing that. we would let our partners know if that occasion presented itself. that offer stands. nearly all of our partners and allies are convinced that president assad is a tyrant, hell-bent on clinging to power, is no longer fit to lead the syrian people and he must go. >> as well as syria and iran the united states faces new challenges from islammix extremism in african, yet it is not clear they are ready to stand on their own by 2014 when u.s. troops are scheduled to withdraw. and great power politics are on the a lend-- agenda again. china is confident, insertive in the south china sea in relations about moskow have cooled. all of this with a troubled economy at home and calls for a lighter footprint abroad. i'm pleased to have tom donilon back at this table. welcome.
that they agree with far more than men do with senator kerrey on foreign policy, and they just trashed him. >> does he have the know-how to manage a barrel at the pentagon? >> he was unsteady with his answers, grasp of the facts. later in the afternoon, the third round of hearings, after he was more sure-footed, does he have the capacity to do it? i think so. if you listen to his exchanges with senator king from maine, managing the defense department, it was a much more competent answer. >> what about this jewish lobby phrase? he apologized for using that phrase, but listen to this exchange. >> name one person who is intimidated by the israeli lobby in the u.s. senate. >> the use of intimidation -- i should have used influence. >> he could not name one person publicly. this is gamesmanship of the first order. you have conversations with plenty of members of congress and they feel one way about some of the issues in the middle east, that they simply cannot move an inch on issues involving israel. >> is he in command of the issues? >> i do not think anybody would have come off well. i think
and its impact on neighboring countries. then, a look at foreign policy challenges facing the obama administration. after that, a discussion about the state of women's rights around the world. >> if you have some hotshot who just got his phd in computer science from stanford, she is getting offers from all over the world. to say you can stay in some limbo for six years, that is not really competitive. >> congress can do a lot. you do not have to be efficient on your iphone or blackberry to understand the application of policy and what makes it work and does not. >> it is very difficult to make investment decisions and expect any kind of return on investment when you have no way to predict the future. our difficulty right now is that there is no consistency or certainty in in our policy decisions. >> the government's role in technology and policy, from this years ces international consumer electronics show. monday night on the communicators on c-span2. >> at age 65, she was the oldest first lady when her husband became president. she never set foot in washington. her husband, benjami
the fears of progressives as obama conducts a foreign policy that looks like bush's. i am not pro-drone. i am pro-destroying al qaeda. i am pro-protecting america. i am pro-a better drone program and i am pro ending this war as soon as we can but i fear that's a long way away. as douglas macarthur said, only the dead have seen the end of war, and we may now be in a permanent war. okay. that does it for "the cycle." martin, it's yours. >> passionate patriotism from toure. thank you. it's monday, february 11th, and a pope has abdicated, the president prepares to face the nation, but republicans are still stuck on benghazi. >> the president's state of the union address. could be the president's last best chance to address a captive audience. >> do republicans have the leverage now? >> none of the things i ran on as part of the tea party have been fixed. >> i don't want to live with this sequester. >> how do we get growth with jobs? >> no confirmation without information. >> are you going to support him for defense secretary? >> i will see the rest of the answers to his questions but certainly
, immigration, the environment, everything basically, but his lead on foreign policy is a staggering 14 points. what makes republicans think this is a good thing to have a fight over? >> right. up until recently everybody said, look, politics stops at the water's edge, and that hasn't been the case for the last couple years with this republican party. but it turns out that it wasn't necessarily that both parties followed that axiom because they were being nice about it. it turns out that it's incredibly bad politics to challenge your sitting president overseas. and, you know, this benghazi thing has not worked out for the republican party at all. they tried effectively to make it the biggest issue of the presidential campaign in the last several weeks, and people just didn't buy into it. what they saw is a tragedy. something that was -- if it could have been prevented, it should have been prevented, but they weren't going to start pointing blame and ask for the resignations of hillary clinton and throw barack obama out of office. >> right. >> and the idea that you'd be able to stop future cia
saying you know foreign policy, here is another bit of evidence that it is run from the white house. now the president has the perfect right to overrule. >> yes. >> he is is the can kmnd-- commander in chief and some of the best decisions a man named elliott cone write a book on this, some of the best presidential decisions have been overruled. so within that perfect right he is, nonetheless the concentration of power in the white house across a whole range of spheres is i think a little troubling. and seconds's very hard to believe that there wasn't any politics in this domestic politics, i mean. now it could be arming the rebels was ineffective but if you have this broad sweep of people saying we should arm the rebels and the white house says no, it's hard to believe since it was so politically convenient not-- that it wasn't a mistake. and now the wrong rebels are in -- >> politics does have a role sometimes. >> the president did, in fact, overrule his advisors, including the vice president, including the secretary of defense gates, on going after osama bin laden. and elise ened to jo
? >> ultimately the key decision makers in american foreign policy are the same people. which is the president and its key advisors on the national security council. and the issue is not whether or not the advocates in the state department or the pentagon are there. i think at some point the united states government and the white house have to make a decision that syria is an actual danger to america's national security interests. it is not something we can wash our hands from. and there are serious dangers and implications to the united states and the president actually to ask its national security team for realistic options that then he request gather his team and debate and decide about. there hasn't, i think, been a serious debate even with thunited stasgovernment as to what might be our three top options what are the costs and benefits of each. and if we were to pursue one of them, how would we do it. >> is there a legitimate argument that this destabilizes turkey to some degree, an important country to the united states, and a nato ally, andrew. >> absolutely. thousands of syrians go ove
a serious discussion about foreign policy in defense during these nomination hearings. whether it's hagel or brennan or whatever. they're just taking cheap shots all over the place and they're not having a serious discussion. >> what -- >> in other words, if dick cheney wants to get in the ball game and have a really serious -- >> you raise this, i have to answer your question. what is the burr in lindsey graham's saddle? >> well -- >> why is he putting a hold on hagel? >> he's not going to put a hold on hagel. that's just -- he's just grabbing his ankles on the way out the door. hagel is going to be confirmed. it's a done deal. john mccain has blessed it. john mccain said he gave the committee enough -- said hagel gave the committee enough information i'm not going to hold him up on benghazi. i think lindsey graham is there to be the last annoying guy to make sure that hagel keeps whatever promises he made behind the scenes -- >> howard, does this -- >> to carl levin and -- >> the cisco kid may have handed 9 okay but poncho is still fighting the war. thank you, howard and joan. >>> miche
when he's had a stellar record on foreign policy. >> but you know these babbitts that sit in the audience for people like him. these bergers. you can see them from the rotary club, very polite. i can hear the audience, excellent point. well put, vice president. this second rate -- they all agree, they wouldn't have approved these people. wyoming doesn't deserve this guy. it's a beautiful state. >> i think that maybe dick cheney has a case of drone envy here. >> yeah. >> really? >> well, i mean -- >> go on, sir. >> okay. he's the guy who is used to being attacked by the aclu. >> i see. >> you see what i'm saying? actually president obama has got some weapons that dick cheney wouldn't mind having had, and the president -- >> this is getting way too -- pull back. >> and the president has been unafraid to use them. >> right. >> serious point -- >> i get -- >> the republicans spent a generation unhorsing democrats because democrats were, quote, weak on defense. >> they weren't willing to pull the trigger. >> they weren't willing to pull the trigger. barack obama, to the dismay
, but they said the air strike was aimed at stopping a shipment of weapons to hezbollah in lebanon. a foreign policy analyst i spoke to earlier, asking if syria wanted to influence. >> israel will claim it does not want to intervene, that this was an action against militants, but if you look at israel's real strategy, if you put yourself in the shoes of the prime minister's national security advisers and you wanted to buttress the regime of the dictator assad because you prefer that to a democracy, the one action you would take would be an attack on the regime. it seems counterintuitive, but it is not. this lends legitimacy to bashar al-assad. from israel's perspective this seems likely. >> is it likely israel consulted washington before it attacked? >> my understanding is israel did not inform washington it was going to do this. the united states check the box and said, we support israel's right to defend itself. this was not israel defending itself. this was a pre-emptive action, and i just have to believe people in washington are quite disturbed by it. it came during hagel hearings and was
box right? >> such a key component of obama's foreign policy has been we're going to slip in across borders, we're going to do covert actions kill who we need to kill as we view that. it is extremely -- you know, these kind of things, the way these things operate the machinery behind it when you read this memo, i mean this is what you would call, you know, a barnburner scoop. this is actually amazing stuff to see this written down in black and white the way the government does this. >> bill: again i think liberals progressives, would be raising holy hell if george bush and dick cheney -- if this were their policy demanding at least to know what the guidelines are. i think we should be equally strong, i believe in making that demand. even if it's president obama and joe biden. their policy. because this is a big deal. and you know -- >> if you think guys likewide-do that? -- wyden will do that? >> bill: he wrote letters saying we want to see all of the memos on drone policy and we want to see what the guidelines are. what rules you are following. and i think the american people deser
is that they are two policies now. they were two managements of foreign policy. one low level, and a different one strategic going out of the white house, and many thinks the white house had at the time objectives not really informed at the security council on the one hand or the state department. lou: let me ask you just straight up, yes or no. were you disappointed or disgusted at the conduct of the president of the united states and the secretary of state? >> i think that by trying to put this on the video, this was a diversion from what was happening on the ground, and they tried not to inform the american public before the elections. i think that's the con consensuf most of us, those of us who know what the jihadists were trying to do. lou: thank you for being with us. more on the rising tensionings in -- tensions in the middle east and president obama's response with the a-team next. the northeast hit by another big storm. in fact, a record storm. the blizzard update is next. bush whacked or hacked, however you want to say it, the bush family photos and secret e-mails of the former first fam
kind of effect on this ever shrinking global community - on foreign policy, on veterans, serving our military families and our service members. >> gabbard joins illinois' tammy duckworth as the first two female combat veterans sworn into office. gabbard takes that responsibility seriously. >> it's kind of amazing that it's taken this long because we've had women who've raised their hands and volunteered to serve on the frontlines dating all the way back to the civil war. and the fact that we have over 1.8 million women veterans across the country, women who are leaving their families, leaving their jobs, leaving school behind to go and serve our country every single day is a story that hasn't been told enough. women face unique challenges in military service but also bring unique contributions that also need to be talked about. so that's one thing that i look forward to being able to do is to be a voice for this huge constituency of selfless heroes that hasn't really had a firsthand voice or a strong voice here in congress >> and for gabbard, being in congress is about serving the pe
or seen as instruments of foreign policy. to undercover operations they don't want a military operation. but in with these meetings talking about afghanistan with the departure of agriculture after afghanistan and robert gates grew up in kansas have been no they know how to grow anything? it has been a problem. betray a says come i'm. they're not trained to do that with a they should or not the they have never been trained civic i appreciate you coming. i am a retired artillery officer hinder than betray us with that kind of gap it was a culture shock but with special forces and insurgency and if it meshes with the drones reusing that seems to be proliferating and your take on the ethical concerns a said capturing people we blow them away. >> one thing crystal did did create so he reached out to resolve the different intelligence agencies and conventional forces. when he went out he had access to every kind of intelligence there was handed revolutionized, a very integrated. that could be the subject of another talk. one, in terms of casualties is somebody fired a drone and was on me not
on foreign policy. when his father ron paul ran for president he got in trouble with a lot of republicans because his foreign policy was anti-war and isolationist which a lot of republicans didn't like. rand paul is departing from that, trying to make himself more acceptable, i think, to mainstream republicans. >> so you think we'll have another paul on the ballot in 2016. is rand paul remotely electable, nia-malika henderson? >> i'm not really sure. >> nationally. >> if you look at what happens, the republicans as much as we can talk about how they have moved to the right, the last candidates that have come out of these primaries have been moderates. you think about mitt romney, john mccain. is there going to be a third party, the tea party that breaks away from the gop. we'll have to wait and see. >> thanks to both of you. good to see you on this sunday. >> thank you. >> just ahead, top of the hour. the big dig has a new meaning in boston. digging out from more than three feet of snow, but it won't be in time for school tomorrow. good news force kids. bad news for parent. plus, californ
get away. went into iraq. when you look at how he conducted foreign policy between iraq and afghanistan and how this president has gotten us out of iraq and afghanistan, gotten bin laden and is certainly a lot less casualties than we've been having but that being said, you know chris, we should have a legal expert out on what makes you an american citizen or not or whether that makes you an enemy combatant, i don't know. >> well, you know, also we created al-qaeda since osama bin laden and ha deem to go after the soviets in afghanistan. we really have nothing to complain about. we put that all in motion. >> stephanie: richard in chicago. >> caller: good morning. i think -- i'm a big obama supporter but this is just wrong. i do feel like -- and i'm not going to blame this -- this policy is an obama policy. the escalation of drones. it has been happening. you know i just think it is a slippery slope where it turns into a convenient way to intervene, you know. you can withdraw from afghanistan and iraq without using drones. this is just an escalation of his policy and you k
and it is the lasting legacy of foreign policy. >> and that leave mes with the question because of so many ideological differences of president obama and president bush, but not on this. it suggests possibilities that presidents are just presidents and they always expand their kind of war powers which is one possibility, and the other is that the president nose something that i don't know about what constitutes threats to the national security, and the third is that well, on this one question, this president is just as hawk ish as george w. bush and any way to adjudicate the possibilities of what war means to the obama administration? >> well, i think that, i think that is absolutely right, it has been a continuation of the bush administration policies, and yes, administrations always try to push the outer bounds of the authority. but one thank is clear is that the laws of war have not changed even if the practice has changed. there are really three reasons that a country can, a state can use force outside of its borders. one, if it is the victim of an armed attack and second if the u.n. security coun
/11 obviously certainly on foreign policy became much more conservative. >> he always was. i mean, he was always a sort of new york zionist, supported israel wholeheartedly, you know, sent a delegation to central america in the mid-'80s to chart a course against, you know, sort of the communist rule in nicaragua. that sort of thing in foreign policy terms. but in sort of fiscal terms and in governance terms, he would say, you know, siding with criminals over law-abiding citizens is nuts. saying it's okay to do graffiti on subways is nuts. saying that it's okay for homeless people to sleep on grates on second avenue is nuts. this was all very much the way ordinary people felt, and they felt that democrats and the leadership of the left had turned against ordinary citizens and the good order of their lives. and he stood up against that. >> right. and seemed same and rational unless you were a member of the democratic establishment in the late '70s and '80s when koch was mayor. so it sounds very sane and rational right now in new york city. it didn't at the time. >> it was a much different -- the t
dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? yes or no. >> my reference to the -- >> are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is, were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> well -- >> i would like the answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot of things today. >> well, let the record show you refuse to answer that question. >> ana, the viewers may not know the history between hagel and mccain. they were close friends in 2000. not so in 2008 when it was clear that hagel's wife was supporting obama and not mccain. was that personal? >> i don't think so at all. anybody who ever saw mccain grill donald rumsfield knows that this is john mccain. this is his job. they are there to advise and consent, not to rubber stamp. if they are not going to get the scrutiny and tough questions now, then when? >> why was he so much tougher on chuck hagel than john kerry? >> because there are so many inconsistenci
of a big deal. for anyone who is -- pays attention to american foreign policy and military affairs you know that ever since the attacks on this country on 9/11 the united states has had to evolve militarily and in the intelligence community to meet the challenge of this new enemy and more than anyone i can think of, general mcchrystal has been responsible for shaping the evolution and developing what i call the targeting engine which is what we adopted as the primary method of defending the country. thank you for being here, great to see you. >> thanks for two kind introduction. i thought of you as a nonfiction writer but you have gone into fiction now. >> you were the commander of special operations in iraq and afghanistan and there have been a rapid evolution. i am familiar from writing blackhawk down the way things were nearly 90s. can you give us an idea of the overall strategy that has evolved and we will get to specifics but also the tactics you have developed? >> a group of people did. thanks. taking it back a little bit at the end of the vietnam war as america has done at the end of
further reference as well. hosting where the debate is doctor bucci, director of our center for foreign policy studies. he previously served heritage a senior research fellow for defense and homeland security. is well-versed in the special area operations and cybersecurity areas as well as defense support to civil authorities. he served for three decades as an army special forces officer in july 2001 coming assume the duties of military assistance to secretary rumsfeld and worked daily with the secretary for the next five and a half years, and then upon retirement from the army continued at the pentagon is deputy assistant secretary of defense, homeland defense, and america security affairs but please join me in welcoming steve bucci. [applause] >> let me add my welcome to all of you. i think you're going to have a real treat this morning, as john mentioned him on a special forces officer by profession, and so this area is near and dear to my heart. this is kind of what we do. they don't let me do it anymore. i mentioned to max when he came in a little historical artifact, and that when
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 73 (some duplicates have been removed)